India Today / India / North / StoryCourtesy: Headlines TodayShiv Aroor New Delhi, January 20, 2012 | UPDATED 17:44 IST
The Ministry of Defence ignored a crucial document which shows that Army chief General V.K Singh's contention on his age was accepted and there was no controversy on it within the forces. The document clearly gives the Army chief an edge over the government's stand on the issue in the court.
Headlines Today accessed the July 2011 note from the military secretary's (MS) branch which states that the chief's age be treated as May 10, 1951 and not 1950.
The document, signed by then military secretary Lt Gen G.M Nair, provides instances of selection boards that promoted V.K Singh up the ranks based on 1951 as the year of birth.
click here to enlarge
The reason why this document could prove crucial is that it was the MS branch that originally had in its possession the documents which recorded the chief's year of birth as 1950.
In other words, the document is the MS branch recommending that the anomalous records in its possession be ignored and 1951 be treated as the year of Singh's birth.
As it turned out, the government chose not to accept this recommendation. However sources told Headlines Today that the document strengthens the chief's case and could prove a trump card in the Supreme Court.
The document also lays to rest the notion that there was any internal conflict over the chief's age between the MS branch and the adjutant general's branch.
Read more at: Govt ignored military secretary's recommendation on Army chief's age
Tuesday, January 24, 2012
Govt ignored military secretary's recommendation on Army chief's age
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Disclaimer
The contents posted on these Blogs are personal reflections of the Bloggers and do not reflect the views of the "Report My Signal- Blog" Team.
Neither the "Report my Signal -Blogs" nor the individual authors of any material on these Blogs accept responsibility for any loss or damage caused (including through negligence), which anyone may directly or indirectly suffer arising out of use of or reliance on information contained in or accessed through these Blogs.
This is not an official Blog site. This forum is run by team of ex- Corps of Signals, Indian Army, Veterans for social networking of Indian Defence Veterans. It is not affiliated to or officially recognized by the MoD or the AHQ, Director General of Signals or Government/ State.
The Report My Signal Forum will endeavor to edit/ delete any material which is considered offensive, undesirable and or impinging on national security. The Blog Team is very conscious of potentially questionable content. However, where a content is posted and between posting and removal from the blog in such cases, the act does not reflect either the condoning or endorsing of said material by the Team.
Blog Moderator: Lt Col James Kanagaraj (Retd)
Neither the "Report my Signal -Blogs" nor the individual authors of any material on these Blogs accept responsibility for any loss or damage caused (including through negligence), which anyone may directly or indirectly suffer arising out of use of or reliance on information contained in or accessed through these Blogs.
This is not an official Blog site. This forum is run by team of ex- Corps of Signals, Indian Army, Veterans for social networking of Indian Defence Veterans. It is not affiliated to or officially recognized by the MoD or the AHQ, Director General of Signals or Government/ State.
The Report My Signal Forum will endeavor to edit/ delete any material which is considered offensive, undesirable and or impinging on national security. The Blog Team is very conscious of potentially questionable content. However, where a content is posted and between posting and removal from the blog in such cases, the act does not reflect either the condoning or endorsing of said material by the Team.
Blog Moderator: Lt Col James Kanagaraj (Retd)
No comments:
Post a Comment